Ad Widget

Collapse

Question about trigger action messages

Collapse
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • xs-
    Senior Member
    Zabbix Certified Specialist
    • Dec 2007
    • 393

    #1

    Question about trigger action messages

    Hi all,

    Our zabbix instances are used in a hosting environment with multiple customers, where each customer has multiple actual users.

    I've set up the zabbix environment in a way where the above works great permission wise, using hostgroups, usergroups and users (all linked to an external CMDB).
    Now i would like to setup alert messaging in a way where i do not have to define hosts, customers or users, nor their relations / permissions in a redundant manner (e.g. define the above elements more than once).

    So i setup a generic form of alerting where i create one user group called 'alerts', to which i send all trigger alert messages. This 'alerts' group has no hosts/nodes permissions defined and all users which are to receive alerts are in this group (plus their customer group which grants them permissions on their hosts).

    My assumption was that when a alert is sent to 'all users' for a specific host, only the users with actual permission for that host would receive the message. It seems that this is not the case; all users in this 'alerts' usergroup receive the message regardless of whether they have permissions for this host or not.

    Question 1; is this behavior by design or is this a bug?
    aka, are permissions sent to users held against the same permission checks used by the web interface for that user, or is it only done by trigger action destination.

    Question 2; If no permission checks are done for sending messages, would adding the permission checks be an acceptable suggestion for implementing this in zabbix?
  • Alexei
    Founder, CEO
    Zabbix Certified Trainer
    Zabbix Certified SpecialistZabbix Certified Professional
    • Sep 2004
    • 5654

    #2
    Originally posted by xs-
    Question 1; is this behavior by design or is this a bug?
    aka, are permissions sent to users held against the same permission checks used by the web interface for that user, or is it only done by trigger action destination.

    Question 2; If no permission checks are done for sending messages, would adding the permission checks be an acceptable suggestion for implementing this in zabbix?
    These are interesting questions. Thank you!

    1. I tend to think that this is a bug.
    2. Of course, adding permission checks is absolutely acceptable and it must be done asap.
    Alexei Vladishev
    Creator of Zabbix, Product manager
    New York | Tokyo | Riga
    My Twitter

    Comment

    • xs-
      Senior Member
      Zabbix Certified Specialist
      • Dec 2007
      • 393

      #3
      Thanks!, i'm very happy with your response.
      This will make the servicing of a large customer base with multiple host groups a lot easier

      Comment

      • xs-
        Senior Member
        Zabbix Certified Specialist
        • Dec 2007
        • 393

        #4
        bump

        Bumping this thread, as 1.6 still has this issue.

        @devs
        I know you guys are busy (with 1.6.1 and all), and i don't want to add too much to the already large stack of work. But erm I am still very much hoping this is implemented/fixed in the near future *smile*.

        Comment

        • Alexei
          Founder, CEO
          Zabbix Certified Trainer
          Zabbix Certified SpecialistZabbix Certified Professional
          • Sep 2004
          • 5654

          #5
          This will be implemented in one of 1.6.x (1.6.1 ?) for sure. I tried to squeeze it into 1.6, unsuccessfully.
          Alexei Vladishev
          Creator of Zabbix, Product manager
          New York | Tokyo | Riga
          My Twitter

          Comment

          • xs-
            Senior Member
            Zabbix Certified Specialist
            • Dec 2007
            • 393

            #6
            ah thanks for your reply.
            I'll wait more patiently next time

            Comment

            • Alexei
              Founder, CEO
              Zabbix Certified Trainer
              Zabbix Certified SpecialistZabbix Certified Professional
              • Sep 2004
              • 5654

              #7
              Just a follow up, permission check for action messages has been implemented for 1.6.2 (not released yet).
              Alexei Vladishev
              Creator of Zabbix, Product manager
              New York | Tokyo | Riga
              My Twitter

              Comment

              • xs-
                Senior Member
                Zabbix Certified Specialist
                • Dec 2007
                • 393

                #8
                Thanks for the update, i saw some comment on this in one of the svn logs.
                I will try to test it this week.

                ^ happy

                Comment

                • welkin
                  Senior Member
                  • Mar 2007
                  • 132

                  #9
                  lucky me i found this thread, adding permission checks to actions will break my configuration as it is right now ;o but i agree that permission checks within actions are very useful but they can also make setups impossible.

                  What if i want to send an email/sms to a customer when e.g. his traffic on a certain switch is too high? i just don't want the customer to have read access to our backbone switch (obviously) but if he pays for "10Mbit average" it would be nice to inform him when he exceedes this limit. So maybe permissions "per-item" could be implemented ?

                  For sure there are other setups where a permission check on actions would not be the best idea.


                  regards welkin

                  Comment

                  • xs-
                    Senior Member
                    Zabbix Certified Specialist
                    • Dec 2007
                    • 393

                    #10
                    Hmm, maybe this could be made into a action condition.

                    Comment

                    Working...